Rural Commuter Rail

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by steveintoronto

What I do see is some runs that start or terminate in Ottawa could do so from Gatineau via Ottawa. Gatineau region is more populace than many other cities VIA serves. It also allows VIA to show, as their mandate implies, that they serve cities interprovincially where possible. The route north of the river also has aspects of better entering Montreal, but that's another matter that involves the Mount Royal Tunnel and REM discussion.

That would be a pretty low-benefit proposition. Downtown Gatineau is only about 4 km from the Ottawa train station (and has good transit connections), and there is no obviously convenient place to put a Gatineau train station. Such a strategy would require a significant curtailing (or maybe elimination) of the o-train service (which serves about 15k passengers per day) and would slow down Via services and tie up rolling stock.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

That would be a pretty low-benefit proposition. Downtown Gatineau is only about 4 km from the Ottawa train station (and has good transit connections), and there is no obviously convenient place to put a Gatineau train station. Such a strategy would require a significant curtailing (or maybe elimination) of the o-train service (which serves about 15k passengers per day) and would slow down Via services and tie up rolling stock.

Not to mention Rapibus using the rail bridge over the Gatineau river. The bridge could be shared, but the train would cause significant delays.

I just can't see Via using the POW bridge for HFR. Maybe one day they would want to re-instate local rail service on the north side of the river, but the benefit of having that train continue from Gatineau to Ottawa, taking the long way around (disrupting local transit), is minimal considering the two cities have decent connections by transit.

[roger1818]

I am curious, back when the NCR had street cars crossing the Ottawa river, were those considered inter-provincial railways and subject to the same laws that the POW bridge is subject to? Would any railway be permitted to run any train on the streetcar tracks because it falls under federal rules?

If so, that is a serious flaw in our legislation. If not, maybe the city needs to have the POW bridge and Trillium line classified under the same rules as a street car.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I am curious, back when the NCR had street cars crossing the Ottawa river, were those considered inter-provincial railways and subject to the same laws that the POW bridge is subject to? Would any railway be permitted to run any train on the streetcar tracks because it falls under federal rules?

.

In Toronto they were afraid of that, which is why the TTC uses a different gauge.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Ok, why don't you educate us small town rubes. What good is an unused, derelict bridge that hasn't been used in decades to Via and HFR?

I looked him up on Urban Toronto. It's laughable that he's calling us small town rubes. He's from Guelph. LOL.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I agree with you that I think the city should stop playing the stupid game (which is why I think discontinuing is the best option).

Moose has no money. All work done so far has been "in kind" which appears to mean pro bono. They cannot buy any bridges, land, rails, stations or anything else. They do not appear to have any paid employees, any assets, or any revenue. They are still trying to come up with a few million for a feasibility study (which seems to be the same state they have been in since 2011).

This is actually an excellent idea. Push for discontinuance. Okay, they can buy the bridge at salvage value. I don't think they even have the funds for that. So, let's see them raise capital fast enough to do this. And if that were to come to pass somehow, they still have to get enough capital to pay the city to double track and build all the rest of the infrastructure.

It's too bad, it's come to this. That bridge is valuable for something to be worked out between Ottawa and Gatineau. But these legal and regulatory shenanigans are ridiculous. Best to discontinue.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I looked him up on Urban Toronto. It's laughable that he's calling us small town rubes. He's from Guelph. LOL.

To be fair he didn't say "small town rube" -that was me being somewhat sarcastic.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

That would be a pretty low-benefit proposition. Downtown Gatineau is only about 4 km from the Ottawa train station (and has good transit connections), and there is no obviously convenient place to put a Gatineau train station. Such a strategy would require a significant curtailing (or maybe elimination) of the o-train service (which serves about 15k passengers per day) and would slow down Via services and tie up rolling stock.

It's a moronic notion. Nobody from Gatineau is asking for VIA to build a station there. And with the Confederation Line coming, Tremblay is super accessible from Gatineau. Heck, you can reach the station faster from downtown Gatineau, even on transit, than you can from most of Ottawa!

I used to work near the Portage buildings. And I could make it to the VIA stations in about 45 minutes (give or take) on transit after work, to catch a train to Toronto or Montreal. I used to budget about an hour. And this whole scenario would be much easier and more predictable with the Confed line and no bus parade through downtown.

Not to mention diverting HFR trains into Gatineau would probably mean trains terminating there. Another moronic move. Now they end up with trains that would not be going to Montreal. And so have half the frequencies of Toronto-Montreal as Toronto-Ottawa. And half the frequencies of Ottawa-Montreal as Toronto-Ottawa. A ridiculous idea since Ottawa-Montreal is the segment with arguably the most ridership potential.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

To be fair he didn't say "small town rube" -that was me being somewhat sarcastic.

Suggesting that the 4th largest metro in Canada has a small town mentality is just as ignorant and offensive. Especially when he lives in Guelph.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

This is actually an excellent idea. Push for discontinuance. Okay, they can buy the bridge at salvage value. I don't think they even have the funds for that. So, let's see them raise capital fast enough to do this. And if that were to come to pass somehow, they still have to get enough capital to pay the city to double track and build all the rest of the infrastructure.

I do agree that this would be the best course of action. Call MOOSE's bluff so to speak. Just because it has been discontinued doesn't mean they can't ever activate it again. Once it has been discontinued, the rail lines on either side of the river will no longer be considered inter-provincial.

From my interpretation of the rules, they don't have to sell it for salvage value if they don't want to. I gather they could also withdraw their application for discontinuance if they don't want to sell it.

From The process for transferring or discontinuing railway line operations Step 3:

The railway company has six months from the advertised deadline to reach an agreement with an interested party. If an agreement is not reached within six months, the railway company may decide to continue the operation of the railway line and amend its three-year plan. If no interest is expressed in the line, or if no agreement is reached with an interested party, or a transfer is not completed in accordance with any agreement reached, the railway company may continue to Step 4.

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Suggesting that the 4th largest metro in Canada has a small town mentality is just as ignorant and offensive.

I'm inclined to reply that no other national capital on this planet would let the only remaining railway bridge to its sister city rot while even actively obstructing its access tracks, but we also talk about the same city which already removed all railway tracks anywhere near its downtown 50 years ago... *sigh*

At least, light rail and (in its smallest possible scale) commuter rail have returned, but will it ever be able to reach the sister city on the other side of the river...?

PS: Ottawa-Gatineau is only the 6th-largest CMA in Canada (after Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton)...

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I'm inclined to reply that no other national capital on this planet would let the only remaining railway bridge to its sister city rot while even actively obstructing its access tracks, but we also talk about the same city which already removed all railway tracks anywhere near its downtown 50 years ago... *sigh*

At least, light rail and (in its smallest possible scale) commuter rail have returned, but will it ever be able to reach the sister city on the other side of the river...?

Not sure they let it rot. CP didn't seem to maintain it either. The city bought a line CP wanted to discontinue and used part of it for a transit. The rest wasn't of much use and was ignored.

I can't think of any capitals where a single track rail bridge are used as an integral part of the city's transportation system.

I agree that the NCC's anti-train policy was pretty short-sited. Timing was bad for Ottawa in that respect.

[acottawa]

It is fortunate for Metrolinx that they don't have to deal with the CTA for letting the former CP line in the Don Valley fall into disrepair.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I'm inclined to reply that no other national capital on this planet would let the only remaining railway bridge to its sister city rot while even actively obstructing its access tracks, but we also talk about the same city which already removed all railway tracks anywhere near its downtown 50 years ago... *sigh*

That decision was made by the un-elected Jacques Gréber of the NCC who seemed to have a hatred for trains and instead thought that Ottawa would be much more beautiful if it was completely paved. I am not sure if the city or regional governments agreed or not, but NCC decisions overrule policies of elected officials, so it doesn't matter (which explains the disdain many from Ottawa have towards the NCC).

As for it's ability to connect Ottawa to Gatineau, it isn't very effective at doing that. It is in a very poor location for passenger rail service and freight rail service is all but gone in Ottawa.

At least, light rail and (in its smallest possible scale) commuter rail have returned, but will it ever be able to reach the sister city on the other side of the river...?

That is a good question. The City of Ottawa can't do it alone though. It needs to be a joint effort with the City of Gatineau. Help would also be needed from the provinces of Ontario and Quebec as well as the Federal Government. Good luck getting everyone on board. Regardless it shouldn't be the responsibility of one city in one province to maintain an inter-provincial bridge without any help.

PS: Ottawa-Gatineau is only the 6th-largest CMA in Canada (after Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton)...

That is old data based on estimates from the 2011 National Household Survey, but according to the 2016 National Census, Ottawa-Gatineau is the 5th-largest CMA in Canada.

[steveintoronto]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Suggesting that the 4th largest metro in Canada has a small town mentality is just as ignorant and offensive. Especially when he lives in Guelph.

Can't you get anything right? I live in Toronto. I spent five years in Guelph, returned to Toronto three years ago. Spent most of my life here, as well is in the UK, the US and time in Europe.

And I stated that Gatineau is a lot larger than many other cities VIA serves. It's over 300,000 in the Gatineau Region. It's the fourth largest urban area in PQ.

True North reveals himself to be Keithz on the Urban Toronto forums. His grasp of facts is renowned.

[steveintoronto]

Originally Posted by roger1818

That decision was made by the un-elected Jacques Gréber of the NCC who seemed to have a hatred for trains and instead thought that Ottawa would be much more beautiful if it was completely paved. I am not sure if the city or regional governments agreed or not, but NCC decisions overrule policies of elected officials, so it doesn't matter (which explains the disdain many from Ottawa have towards the NCC).

As for it's ability to connect Ottawa to Gatineau, it isn't very effective at doing that. It is in a very poor location for passenger rail service and freight rail service is all but gone in Ottawa.

Ottawa used to have one of the most dense railway hubs in Canada. Even the New York Central served it. The NCC was a creature of the National Capital Act. As for who was on the commission:

Members
(4) The members, other than the Chairperson and the Chief Executive Officer, shall be appointed as follows:

(a) three, ordinarily resident in the National Capital Region, from local municipalities in Ontario, at least two of whom must be from the city of Ottawa;

(b) two, ordinarily resident in the National Capital Region, from local municipalities in Quebec, at least one of whom shall be from the section of the city of Gatineau that is west of the Gatineau River; and

(c) eight from Canada generally, other than from a city or municipality referred to in either of paragraphs (a) or (b).

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/N-4/page-1.html#h-3

That is a good question. The City of Ottawa can't do it alone though. It needs to be a joint effort with the City of Gatineau. Help would also be needed from the provinces of Ontario and Quebec as well as the Federal Government. Good luck getting everyone on board. Regardless it shouldn't be the responsibility of one city in one province to maintain an inter-provincial bridge without any help.

It's the responsibility of the Feds. The NCC's policy is to use the bridge for rail, I quoted their reference yesterday, and they've already pledged half the cost of renovating the bridge. Ownership should be completely ceded to them along with costs. The City of Ottawa should be recompensed for what they paid for it plus inflation.

[steveintoronto]

@acottawa writes:

In Toronto they were afraid of that, which is why the TTC uses a different gauge.

That is incorrect. It was only one horse-drawn tram company that used the gauge. All the interurbans used standard gauge, and they were so successful that they threatened the monopoly of the Toronto Street Railway, thus the changes at the Junction, Yonge and Somerville and the many other interurban terminii. The railroads had already entered Toronto many years prior to the trams. In fact the opposite happened. One line to Sutton (Lake Simcoe) was laid standard gauge originally, and when the TTC was formed, assumed by them and the line to Sutton became TTC gauge. It was later changed back to standard. It ran south to the St Lawrence Market, and carried mostly farm goods.

Edit: Reference here:

A long-standing urban myth attributes the odd TTC gauge to concerns rail companies like Canadian Pacific would try to run trains down Toronto streets. Not so, says TTC authority Transit Toronto. The rail spacing was actually meant to allow non-Toronto Street Railway vehicles - horse and wagons - to use the tracks too, providing it didn't interfere with transit operations.

https://www.blogto.com/city/2013/08/a_brief_history_of_the_toronto_transit_commission/

More reference here:

In the Articles of Agreement negotiated between the City of Toronto and the Toronto Street Railway on March 26, 1861, article five states the following: "That the gauge of the said railways shall be such that the ordinary vehicles now in use may travel on the said tracks, and that it shall and may be lawful to and for all and every person and persons whatsoever to travel upon and use the said tracks with their vehicles loaded or empty, when and so often as they may please, provided they do not impede or interfere with the cars of the party of the second part (Toronto Street Railway), running thereon, and subject at all times to the right of the said party of the second part, his executors, and administrators and assigns to keep the said tracks with his and their cars, when meeting or overtaking any other vehicle thereon."

https://transit.toronto.on.ca/streetcar/4002.shtml

It is fortunate for Metrolinx that they don't have to deal with the CTA for letting the former CP line in the Don Valley fall into disrepair.

CTA does regulate it. And the Don Spur is connected one end and is still used for work trains. When the Belleville underpass was reconstructed this last Summer, Metrolinx were required to reinstall rail right after. And they installed heavier rail than the original.

Here's a case brought before the CTA re Metrolinx that GO won:
https://www.otc-cta.gc.ca/node/566922

And here's one they lost:
Canadian Transportation Agency Orders GO Transit to Implement Noise and
Vibration Corrective Measures at West Toronto Diamond
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/ca...s-at-west-toronto-diamond-539039831.html

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

I'm inclined to reply that no other national capital on this planet would let the only remaining railway bridge to its sister city rot while even actively obstructing its access tracks, but we also talk about the same city which already removed all railway tracks anywhere near its downtown 50 years ago... *sigh*

No other national capital would end up with such a ridiculous regulatory regime either. Tell me of another capital which is not a distinct sub-national authority (like a territory or province itself), and has no authority on at least 20% of the region's population, and yet is mandated to put 30% of the jobs of the national government in the region over which they have no authority.

The ridiculous situation that Ottawa is in, is not a fault of the city or its residents. It's a direct result of being jerked around by the feds, Ontario and Quebec. And it's high time the city started looking out for its own interests first.

And speaking of looking after its best interest, what exactly does the PoW bridge do for Ottawa. We've been through so many discussions here on how to fit it into the region's transit. But, however, you slice it, the bridge is not really the most convenient way across. The added transfers that result from having two different transit authorities (STO/OC T) mean that transfer points are not optimal. I see zero value for anything more than a pedestrian bridge until we get to point where Gatineau can convert the Rapibus corridor to LRT. And we're probably a decade or more away from that.

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

PS: Ottawa-Gatineau is only the 6th-largest CMA in Canada (after Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton)...

4th to 5th. Does not change steveintoronto's ridiculous assertion that Ottawa is some provincial backwater. The guy probably hasn't been to Ottawa in a decade or more. And that's exactly why he's clueless about Gatineau's context in Ottawa.

Come on. It's not like Tremblay is that far from Hull. Would take you longer from say Bank and Hunt Club to get to the station than from Hull. One look at a map and it's pretty obvious that Hull is in Tremblay's catchment. But hey, if VIA starts building stations 8 kms apart, with hourly service, we might not need MOOSE! So maybe steveintoronto is on to something.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

That decision was made by the un-elected Jacques Gréber of the NCC who seemed to have a hatred for trains and instead thought that Ottawa would be much more beautiful if it was completely paved. I am not sure if the city or regional governments agreed or not, but NCC decisions overrule policies of elected officials, so it doesn't matter (which explains the disdain many from Ottawa have towards the NCC).

Politicians were happy to go along too. It was just the zeitgeist of the era. They were ripping up rail lines in lots of places in that era. The difference in Ottawa the federal government dumped a huge amount of cash into the capital (something they didn't do before and have not done since) so they NCC was able to be way more thorough about relocating the rail network away from the city centre.

The other thing Ottawa lacked is satellite cities of any size to provide destinations for trains to go, which sped up the process of shuttering train services.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by steveintoronto

The NCC was a creature of the National Capital Act. As for who was on the commission:

You basically proved my point. The two things I take from your quote are:

1. That they are Appointed (not elected), which is what I said.
2. That 61.5% must not be from the national capital region.

As a result, decisions made by the NCC don't represent the will of Ottawa residents

It's the responsibility of the Feds.

Agreed. The corollary of that is the responsibility shouldn't be left to the City of Ottawa Ontario.

The NCC's policy is to use the bridge for rail, I quoted their reference yesterday, and they've already pledged half the cost of renovating the bridge.

Sorry, you use so many quotes I tend to just gloss over them (quotes and links are best used to back your statements not to make them).

Ownership should be completely ceded to them along with costs. The City of Ottawa should be recompensed for what they paid for it plus inflation.

Fine, but to my knowledge, no one from the Federal Government or NCC has made such an offer.